MIDTERM EXAMINATION

1. Atty. Jose is a court attorney working for an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines. He
has pending application for the position of MTC Judge in Batangas City. However, it was discovered by
some other lawyers that in the application forms he filled out, he failed to disclose his religion on the
belief that he need not disclose it as he no longer believes in God. Can he be the subject of an
administrative case for failure to disclose his religion?
2. Define:
a. Practice of Law
b. Legal Ethics
3. Atty. Jose posted in various social media sites his belief that muslims in Mindanao should be eradicated,
including the women and children in order to solve the problem in Mindanao.
a. Does he remain fit to be a lawyer? Why or why not?
b. If you were his counsel in an administrative case filed against him, what would be your defense?
4. Jose graduated from San Beda Law with honors. He took the bar and scored 99.9%, the highest in history.
Before he took his oath, a complaint was filed against him alleging that he should not be allowed to take
the oath because he connived with the registrar of San Beda to make it appear he completed all the
required English units before getting the JD degree. He claimed this was not really the case and that he
did not know that he has incomplete English subjects. He later on discovered that it was his dad, who is an
influential figure, who asked the registrar to fabricate the lacking units for English. Claiming he was in
good faith, he asked the Court to allow him to take the oath.
a. If you were the ponente, will you agree with him and allow him to take the oath? Why or why
not?
b. Assuming he was not allowed to take the oath and eventually completed his lacking English
subjects, should he take the bar once more before taking the oath?
5. Atty. Jose, a retired Supreme Court Justice decided to petition the Supreme Court to remove him from the
Rolls, which was granted. He claimed he was ashamed of what is happening with the Judicial System. He
died later on. His heirs then asked the court to allow them to use the title of Attorney in their father’s
grave. IF you were the Court, will you allow the same?
6. Atty. Jose, a bachelor, had a relationship with another lawyer named Atty. Mark. They went to the US to
get married. Upon returning to the Philippines, both found out that a disbarment case was filed against
them for unethical and immoral conduct. It was alleged that marriage between two men is not recognized
in the Philippines and is against good customs and public policy and therefore, should be a ground for
disbarment. Rule.
7. Atty. Jose fell in love with Maria, then a law student. Prior to Maria taking the bar, the couples wed under
exceptional circumstances. They decided to keep it a secret until Maria becomes a lawyer. Maria then
applied for the bar examination and declared herself as single. Later on and after passing the bar,
someone filed a disbarment case against Maria for violation of Canon claiming the non-disclosure of
marital status is an indication of lack of good moral character. Rule.
8. Explain the case of In Re Cunanan.
9. Explain why the practice of law is a mere privilege.
10. Senator Maria, a senator, uttered in the halls of the Senate libelous remarks against the President during
here privileged speech. The President’s supporters, after feeling offended, filed a disbarment case against
her. Will she be disbarred for her remarks uttered during the privileged speech? Explain.